The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
What Happened???
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: milomorris on February 14, 2012, 01:56:36 am ---So no. Its not just parents.
--- End quote ---
Thank you, Milo. All of those other situations you described are part of the problem, too. There's a complex web of influences on children these days, and rather than look in the mirror and deal with it, what society essentially does is shrug and say it's the parents responsibility to keep their kids from being exposed to it. The solution, I guess, is to hold your children in a tower until they're 18.
--- Quote from: RouxB on February 14, 2012, 01:40:08 am ---I think it takes raising a child to appreciate how difficult it is but it doesn't take being a parent to see poor parenting decisions.
--- End quote ---
The things Marie mentioned -- being abusive or strung out on drugs, letting your kid raise him/herself while you're out with a different guy every night -- those are poor parenting decisions, unquestionably.
But the things delalluvia mentioned? Subscribing to cable TV? Owning a computer? Signing your kid up for organized sports? Those aren't poor parenting decisions. Those are lifestyle choices that come with many upsides as well as downsides, and that everyone else in the culture is entitled to make. In the the case of organized sports, they're decisions that were actually made, presumably, to benefit the kids: to keep them physically fit and occupied with something healthy, to cultivate their skills and interests.
The reason it takes being in these situations to fully appreciate them is the same reason the phrase "walk a mile in my moccasins" came about. It's very easy to see what you would do as a parent when the children themselves are abstractions, when you haven't experienced the pressures and stresses that come from knowing the actual kids and trying to raise them, not in an empty room or an ivory tower, but in a complex society. In this abstract world, an acquaintance can spend two minutes thinking about what a parent has spent five or ten or fifteen years struggling with and instantly see a simple solution that would solve everything that somehow the parent is too idiotic (or wimpy) to discern. In this abstract world, children are who they are because of your parenting actions, never the other way around. I know, because I used to live in a world like that myself. And BTW, it's not only non-parents who live in that abstract world; it's also parents who did such and such with their kids and assume anybody else can do the same thing with any other kids under any other circumstances and achieve the same results.
When you're deciding whether to have computers and cell phones and cable TV, should it matter that the kid will be surrounded by other kids who have all of those things and will be talking about them constantly? Not if the kid is an abstraction. An abstract world is one where your word is law, you say no, your abstract kid will frown and maybe even quietly grumble a bit but that's the end of it and you go blithely on about your business.
When the kids are an abstraction, it's easy to decide that instead of signing them up for soccer and ballet you will "let them play in the back yard with each other and the dog and neighborhood kids." You can safely assume that they aren't particularly talented at soccer and ballet and aren't longing to do those things, that they don't have close friends who do those things, that your back yard is safe and pleasant, that the kids will play obediently in it even if you leave them unsupervised, that there are other kids in the neighborhood who aren't in programs themselves who will join them, that the back yard is big enough that they can actually get exercise in it and stay fit, that they can do the same thing in the back yard day after day and stay stimulated and entertained, that the back yard will still be all they need year after year as they become older and have no experience with any other sport or activity. Heck, when it's all an abstraction you can imagine that even if they get sick of playing on the same swingset or throwing the dog the same stick after a couple of weeks they can just study grass or clouds or ants or the dog's fur or something -- the whole world is like a science lesson and by gosh, they're kids, they should appreciate it. Simple!
Now, I'm not saying that you have to cave to every whim or request. Obviously you don't. And you're absolutely right, Roux, your friend should not bankroll her child's lifestyle if she doesn't approve of it.
Judging from the posts here, I am probably somewhat wimpy, probably let my kids do things others would think I should refuse -- especially if, to those people, the kids and the situation are abstractions. But the reality is that I've got the various pressures I've got and the time constraints I've got and the environment I've got and the personality I've got and, most important, the kids I've got. And there's only so much stress I'm willing to take on. I would go into more detail but it still probably wouldn't be sufficient to convince anyone and anyway I'm not here to defend my life choices.
Though I'm sure if I did, delalluvia would immediately spot all kinds of simple, easy things I could do differently that would solve my problems. Just as it's easy for me to see all kinds of simple things she could do to resolve conflicts with her sister.
Anyway, I pick my battles, and when I don't expend the energy to prevent their exposure to something -- inappropriate song lyrics, for example -- I make clear, like Milo's grandfather watching Dallas except even more overtly, what I think of them. I know my kids may not agree with me now, because I didn't agree with my parents when I was 16, either. I hope that someday they will see things differently, just as I do now.
In the meantime, though, I think it's important that people recognize that kids do not grow up in a vacuum, and that even the strictest, most limit-setting parents are not able to create one. Roux, I'm sure your friend did everything she could to impart her values on her daughter, and yet the daughter chose to live with her boyfriend anyway. Would the daughter have made that same choice in 1950? No way. The mother could have been the world's wimpiest parent and it still wouldn't have happened, because it was a different culture.
When people say "it takes a village," they don't just mean that the neighbor should watch the kids sometimes so the mother can run to the grocery store, or the old lady down the street should yell at them if she sees them misbehaving (although those things would be good, too). It also means that the village has to create a culture -- schools, institutions, public behavior, entertainment, etc. -- that will send the kinds of messages and instill the kinds of values we want kids to have.
In our culture, the values we apparently want our kids to have is an appreciation for material things and an eagerness to buy them.
So as a culture, we tell kids at every turn -- not just on cable, but on regular TV -- that adults are square and stupid, that kids are smart and cool, that brands are extremely important, and that -- most importantly -- they should spend their money on this junk food, on this music, on this movie, on this whatever they're trying to sell. And we have another layer of support -- the respected music writers, for example, who celebrate 17-year-old Tyler the Creator and his violent, misogynistic lyrics -- who refuse to criticize because that would be uncool.
And then we complain about how the kids turn out.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on February 14, 2012, 10:34:04 am ---The solution, I guess, is to hold your children in a tower until they're 18.
--- End quote ---
Believe me, if my mother could have figured it out, she would have. You know what people say about parents with 3 boys...
--- Quote from: serious crayons on February 14, 2012, 10:34:04 am ---It also means that the village has to create a culture -- schools, institutions, public behavior, entertainment, etc. -- that will send the kinds of messages and instill the kinds of values we want kids to have.
In our culture, the values we apparently want our kids to have is an appreciation for material things and an eagerness to buy them.
So as a culture, we tell kids at every turn -- not just on cable, but on regular TV -- that adults are square and stupid, that kids are smart and cool, that brands are extremely important, and that -- most importantly -- they should spend their money on this junk food, on this music, on this movie, on this whatever they're trying to sell. And we have another layer of support -- the respected music writers, for example, who celebrate 17-year-old Tyler the Creator and his violent, misogynistic lyrics -- who refuse to criticize because that would be uncool.
And then we complain about how the kids turn out.
--- End quote ---
Rather just crow my agreement, let me offer something a bit more substantive.
So far, everyone in this thread has offered solutions, anecdotes from our past experiences, and suggestions on how to fix things. I am also aware of an attitude among many--mostly liberal-thinking individuals--that when talk of "family values," or "restoring America," surfaces, it causes them to bristle and become suspicious. But here I go. I don't think its "turning back the clock" to take a look at our past, and pull some successful methods and best practices off the shelf. There has to be a way to turn the tide. I'm sure there is some combination of parental, educational, governmental, corporate, and civic re-directions that could create an environment where children have greater incentives to achieve than consume. There must be a way to bring back common courtesy, mutual respect, and pride in one's community. There must be a way to spark in our young people the desire to do better than we did.
There are many efforts out there that attack an element here, or address an issue there. I applaud Michelle Obama's childhood obesity campaign, as well as Verizon Reads. They are both useful programs. But each has limitations. There's got to be a way to stitch things together, and repair our moral fabric.
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: milomorris on February 14, 2012, 11:45:26 am ---Rather just crow my agreement, let me offer something a bit more substantive.
So far, everyone in this thread has offered solutions, anecdotes from our past experiences, and suggestions on how to fix things. I am also aware of an attitude among many--mostly liberal-thinking individuals--that when talk of "family values," or "restoring America," surfaces, it causes them to bristle and become suspicious. But here I go. I don't think its "turning back the clock" to take a look at our past, and pull some successful methods and best practices off the shelf. There has to be a way to turn the tide. I'm sure there is some combination of parental, educational, governmental, corporate, and civic re-directions that could create an environment where children have greater incentives to achieve than consume. There must be a way to bring back common courtesy, mutual respect, and pride in one's community. There must be a way to spark in our young people the desire to do better than we did.
There are many efforts out there that attack an element here, or address an issue there. I applaud Michelle Obama's childhood obesity campaign, as well as Verizon Reads. They are both useful programs. But each has limitations. There's got to be a way to stitch things together, and repair our moral fabric.
--- End quote ---
I agree with some of this, even though I'm probably often on the other side than you in the so-called "culture wars." I wish there were a way that we could change our culture's values.
On the other hand, we shouldn't romanticize the past. In the past, kids didn't swear at their parents or live with their boyfriends or sag their pants or listen to music with awful lyrics. But, as you know, they had other moral failings.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on February 14, 2012, 12:05:15 pm ---On the other hand, we shouldn't romanticize the past. In the past, kids didn't swear at their parents or live with their boyfriends or sag their pants or listen to music with awful lyrics. But, as you know, they had other moral failings.
--- End quote ---
Oh, I remember my those failings all too well. I'm just interested in looking at what worked back then.
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: milomorris on February 14, 2012, 12:22:49 pm ---Oh, I remember my those failings all too well. I'm just interested in looking at what worked back then.
--- End quote ---
Actually, though, what I meant was something broader, more cultural. In 1915, for example, the culture didn't accept offensive song lyrics. On the other hand, it did accept Jim Crow law.
I don't mean to emphasize race, particularly -- that's just an easy example, and you could find examples in all kinds of other realms. My point is that, to some degree, it's not that our culture's moral fabric has shredded, it's that our moral values have shifted. Swearing is more OK, slurs less so. Explicit sex is more OK, repression less so.
The question is how to respect and support the freedoms we have achieved, while restoring some of those other solid values you mentioned.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version